"TL(&TR):DR." @V.R.S.
First, you're a liar an you just discredited yourself.
If my statement was "too long, didn't read" then how are you able to quote from it since you claim you didn't read it? All you've confirmed is that you lie as easily as you breathe and have little interest in the subject except as an excuse for an argument.
When you realize you've lost or start to lose interest, you claim you didn't read the reply, the way Ave Crux does..
Second, the statement you quote isn't a non-sequitur at all. It is a statement about a document with a quotation from the document as support, you illiterate.
Observe:
a.) "For the Orthodox, the Catholic Church herself contradicts your claim in "Unitatis Redintegratio". .
That is a statement about a document.
.
b.) "These Churches, although separated from us, possess true sacraments"
That is a quotation from the document as support.
You're a dismal logician and ironically you commonly attempt to argue from logic when your primary goads for flattering your own intellectual vanity have failed.
"No, it does not contradict. Because the above refers to the "true" i.e. Catholic sacraments."
"Unitatis Redintegratio" does not use the word "Catholic" anywhere in the passage I quoted. As a result, you have no business changing what was written, or attempting to "derive" a meaning not present in the text.
The point here is The Church recognizes "true sacraments" from schismatic Orthodox priests which flatly contradicts your claim "there are no "Orthodox" or "Protestant" sacraments.
Both the Orthodox and the Protestands and the Muslims -do- have sacraments, however only those of the Orthodox are recognized by the Church as "true".
You can't speak Latin, you cant read Latin so don't quote in Latin when you're relying on a translation. If I wrote a two-paragraph Latin essay wildly speculating how your mother had carnal relations with the neighbor's dog, you couldn't understand a sentence of it. You'd get on Google Translate faster than the neighbor's dog got on... well, whatever he got on.
Maybe that example isn't as speculative as it seems. It would explain so much about your upbringing and your personality. Some little dogs love snapping at people's legs just for the heck of it. They don't need a reason, only an excuse. You generally appear in the English language section of GTV only when there's a serious debate.
When it's over, the little dog goes back to yapping in his own back-yard.
Using Latin is another one of your intellectual affectations, the "impressive Latin passage". That particular academic pretention doesn't make you "erudite" and it doesn't slow me down even for a minute. ;-)
If you want to quote Canon I and II, just do so in a manner everybody will understand.
You're just playing your stupid games again, like you always do. Further evidence that, as usual, you argue simply for amusement's sake and in bad-faith.
Here's the English...
"Canon I.If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law were not all instituted by Jesus Christ, our Lord; or, that they are more, or less, than seven, to wit, Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order, and Matrimony; or even that any one of these seven is not truly and properly a sacrament: let him be anathema. Canon II. If any one saith, that these said sacraments of the New Law do not differ from the sacraments of the Old Law, save that the ceremonies are different, and different the outward rites: let him be anathema"
...and that has diddly-squat to do with the Church recognizing Orthodox sacraments as "true". It has even less to do with my statement since I'n not claiming anynthing to the contrary.
"I did not know you had become a public heretic and blasphemer."
I haven't and you don't because you're too fixated on trying to find another line of argument. Try reading the quote objectively. Again, it's bad-faith on your part.
When I state, "Different Muslim sects even have different sacraments." That is a factual statement describing the religious beliefs of pagans on sacraments. It in no way reflects any support for their beliefs.
When I quote Muslim scholars, I'm showing support for what Muslims believe about sacraments. That is not what I believe. When I cite the Protestants' claim of having only two sacraments, That is also a factual statement describing the religious beliefs of Christian heretics. Again, It in no way reflects any support for their beliefs.
That should simple enough even for a simpleton transliterating from his native Polish.
By the way, it's worth noting these points appear near the end of the reply you "DR" (Didn't Read)
Again, you're a liar and your own last-ditch stand on this issue proves it.
At this point you're just trying to salvage some kind of a "win" no matter how small. It's the only way you can soothe your freshly bruised ego from a well-deserved beating with a rolled up Vatican decree. :D
No, V.R.S. You're goingo back to the Polish Language section like a bad little puppy, with your head down and your tail dragging between your legs. You get nothing, not even one little table scrap. All you get is one final swat across the nose for snarling at me.
You're all done here. The sooner you accept that fact, the better.:P